The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was established by the United Nations (UN), with the purpose of formulating an outline of the most basic and essential rights and was meant to be applicable to all countries. Formulating these rights were meant to be positive and force governments to cease the deprivation of fundamental rights to its citizens that is rampant to this day, and with that motive in mind it should be a universal, globally acceptable, mandate. However, many rights allotted within the UDHR ignore the cultural differences between countries and many are nonessential meaning unlivable conditions would not be created if this right wasn’t given defeating the original purpose of the UDHR diluting its significance globally. The UDHR cannot be considered truly universal as it’s not applicable to all countries and individuals. The UDHR’s incorporation of nonessential rights and the fact that it’s not required or enforced in any tangible, legal way undermines its legitimacy and allows it to be followed selectively. There remains a significant lack of cultural relativism and bias towards western ideologies. Further, It also doesn’t account for the people of no nation who will be victims of the climate crisis.
The UDHR consistently strays from its objective of enforcing solely the most essential rights for maintaining quality of life and has no real legitimate way of enforcing these rights. By continuing to increase the number of “essential rights” we dilute the value of what is already in place, “The human rights field’s ambitions not only have produced unnecessary clashes over human rights, but they have also diminished the core rights that were meant to, above all else, uphold human dignity” (Kaplan). Demanding a few core human rights would underscore the importance of those rights and increase the likelihood of creating an impact.
Many of the modern human rights being imposed ignore the “freedom of religion” aspect in Article 2 of the Declaration of human rights (United Nations, pp.art. 2.1). For example, illegalizing circumcision delegitimizes the religious ties to the practice and ignores thousands of years of cultural history. The UN also has no legal way of implementing these rights, yet even if they were legally enforceable many countries wouldn’t be able to given their economic state. Developing countries are rife with human rights violations but don’t have the monetary freedom to change their situation, “The problem in many developing countries is that governments lack either the financial resources or the political will to meet their citizens’ educational needs” (Hillman and Jenker). This makes it logistically impossible for these rights to be universally enforced. Overall, This lack of legitimacy and actual necessity makes it inapplicable to every single country as it simply won’t be followed and taken seriously.
The UDHR disregards the multitude of cultures, religions, social norms that are practiced globally, instead the UDHR proliferates a very narrow view right and wrong through the lens of western ideology. The citizens of many countries, particularly in the Middle East, view many of the rights outlined in the UDHR to be in violation of their religions, “Saudi Arabia abstained from the vote on the declaration, arguing that Articles 16 and 18 (the rights for men and women to marry who they choose, and the right to freedom of religion) were in opposition to Islamic faith and teachings which emphasize patriarchal authority” (O’Connor and Ait). They simply don’t have a want for the religious freedoms the UDHR demands as they occupy a very homogenous state in which such practices go against the core beliefs of the population. Article 21 of the UDHR also imposes the ideals of a democratic society, ignoring the benefits of the different forms of government globally, “ “According to a study compiled by researchers at the Centre for Children’s Movement for Civic Awareness in India, most Indian youths demonstrated “authoritarian leanings” and were skeptical about the advantages of democracy” (Tyagi). democracy is not always the answer, success can be found without traditional western views of government structure, “The youth perceive the presence of too many regional and communal interests in the parliament as a hindrance to the achievement of a supreme national goal i.e. economic development. Many Indians believe that a benign dictator or a strong central government is the only means of achieving India’s ambitions.” (Tyagi).
In the past when western ideology has been enforced against the will of a nation’s citizens, protest has been the answer as with the 1963 Iranian Revolution. The UDHR doesn’t account for the regions and communities in which these freedoms will be perceived negatively and retract from quality of life; ignoring the historic consequences of such impositions. Further, its western perspective discredits the functionality of other types of governments.
The UDHR center’s its focus around the governments of existing countries, but ignores those who don’t even have this luxury. The ongoing climate crisis will inevitably lead to the displacement of thousands of individuals leaving them nationless, and many countries have already begun planning for the worst, “In response, Kiribati has essentially been drawing up plans for its demise. The government has promoted “migration with dignity,” urging residents to consider moving abroad with employable skills” (Ives). However, housing for these refugees is not guaranteed and with those facing economic hardship or who lack vocation skills moving may not be as simple or affordable as it seems. Without a government to provide for them following the devolution of their country what rights can they be granted without the protection of “the rule of law” (United Nations, Preamble). Individuals can’t have the right to property, involvement in government, nationality without a nation and without the demand of other countries to take them in. The UDHR lacks representation for the future population of individuals who will be left nationless and fails to account for what rights these individuals are owed. The UDHR cannot apply to these citizens when no country is mandated to provide for their wellbeing.
The UDHR fails on several key aspects which makes it unable to be considered a universal document. Many of the rights it outlines are nonessential and it has no real way of being enforced even if every country had the means of doing so. It also proliferates a secular western view and disregards that many individuals feel their religions are being undermined as a result. The UDHR also doesn’t account for the rights of individuals of no nation who don’t have a governing body to provide for them. With these pitfalls there is no way for this document to be applicable globally and reforms need to be made before it can truly become the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Works Cited
Abrahamlan, Ervand. “Structural Causes of the Iranian Revolution.” Jstor, May 1980, https://www.jstor.org/stable/3011417?seq=6. Accessed 5 April 2024.
Davenport, Coral, and Campbell Robertson. “Resettling the First American ‘Climate Refugees.’” Google Docs, 2 May 2016, https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-5Q2kJrBZMdDfls5RCLEQY3VjT_ZM9t0FP5ozGon6NI/edit. Accessed 5 April 2024.
Hillman, Arye L., and Eva Jenker. “Economic Issues No. 33 – Educating Children in Poor Countries.” International Monetary Fund, International Monetary Fund, 2004, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/issues/issues33/. Accessed 5 April 2024.
Ives, Mike. “A Remote Pacific Nation, Threatened by Rising Seas.” Google Docs, 2 July 2016, https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IrPYFOpTGCpxqCtCFelJrnUfgHhTFS3Da63WqpVVnv0/edit. Accessed 5 April 2024.
Kaplan, Seth. “When Everything Is a Human Right, Nothing Is.” Foreign Policy, 6 September 2019, https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/09/06/when-everything-is-a-human-right-nothing-is/. Accessed 23 January 2024.
Tyagi, Ila. “Human Rights as a Western Construct: India as an Example – The official blog of the UCL Student Pro Bono Committee.” UCL Reflect, 10 April 2017, https://reflect.ucl.ac.uk/access-to-justice/2017/04/10/human-rights-as-a-western-construct-india-as-an-example/. Accessed 5 April 2024.
